Conference 7.286::digital

We've had a few going-away parties for OSG people who gone on to other things
(outside the company).

    Presumably this is for organizations other than the ones who would
    not consider interviewing qualified (i.e., experienced in UNIX or
    OSF/1) *internal* candidates a few months ago because they didn't
    already work under <insert a VP's name here that I can't recall>.
    
    Chris

    keep in mind that digital hiring again does nothing about digital
    laying people off. i believe the policy now is to hire when/where
    needed and can people when/where needed. much cheaper to do that than
    try to predict and plan the business needs and staff or re-train as
    necessary. we're on a reactive vs proactive binge. a binge that's easy
    to get onto. and VERY difficult to get out of.

    I've seen a list of UNIX enngineering positions open...maybe we're
    going outside for talent
    Mark
    

    Digital never stopped hiring. Though I have been a huge cynic towards
    much of what has gone on in the last couple of years I feel we need
    new blood. Any company does. We have hired experienced people from
    other companies and industries as well as people fresh from graduation.
    
    Whether these hires are correct or in the right places is another
    matter. However, during our deepest hiring freezes new people were
    brought on board.
    
    Jim C.
    

    	Yes, but that was when people WANTED to come here and work for
    Digital. If we're looking to outside the company for top Unix talent,
    what possible enticements could we offer to bring them here? Sure, if
    they're currently stuck working for a small startup on shakey ground,
    they might gain a little additional stability coming here. Top
    technical talent usually needs a little better incentive, and we can't
    offer it. So it seems pretty futile to even look outside. Just accept
    the fact that we have lots of poorly-trained, mediocre workers who
    could be retrained to do what they do in Unix engineering. Tough to
    face facts, but this would be more consistent with the corporate
    philosophy these days.

    I sure hear where you are coming from. People are probably not
    beating our doors down. However, there are a lot of unemployed
    out there who would gladly take a job here, some old deccies as
    well. ;-) Some of the College new hires I've talked to obviously
    have great morale, a positive attitude and know little of the
    crap we've put up with. They'll harden in time but perhaps make
    a positive contribution as well.
    
    BTW - Just posted this a.m. on the USENET 2 positions within 
    digital for people with extensive SQL experience. I guess we
    couldn't find this talent inside or maybe we didn't look inside?
    
    Jim C.
    
    

    One must remeber that when a company is concerned primarily with
    cutting costs, replacing older, more expensive people with younger,
    less expensive people makes tunnel-visioned good sense.
    
    kbs
    

    
    
    re .8
    
    true. Newer less expensive probably look better than older, more
    expensive people.
    
    But you get what you pay for and some of the 'stuff' we've been
    shipping lately should be sufficient proof of that...

    Since I work close by the DEC SQL group I want to make sure that
    the record is straight around the SQL job postings noted a few
    replies back.  These postings are part of an escalating process
    to try to find *senior* SQL compiler implementation talent which 
    we need.  To this point those slots have not been able to be filled
    internally.  Believe me, there is no interest in finding inexpensive,
    inexperienced people for these slots in order to (seemingly) save a 
    few dollars.

    
        
    ok, so it seems the way it works now is this:

    DEC wants someone who knows Y, but DEC has someone who knows X, so go
    out find someone who knows Y and lay off the one who knows X.
                                                                       
    why not do it this way?

    DEC wants someone who knows Y, DEC has someone who knows X, so train
    the one who knows X so that they now know Y .

    what an amazing concept !

    if someone says , but we need the one who knows Y right now and we
    dont have time to train them to learn it because the competition will be
    ahead of us by the time we train them, i'd say , well, why did you not 
    think ahead early on and started the training befor so that by now you
    will not have been in this situation.

    i think they call this planing for the future or something strange
    like this.

    another amazing concept !

    \nasser
    

    re:.11
    
    nasser,
    
    You hit the nail right on the head.  Why don't they plan for 
    the future?  What an amazing concept.
    
    Jim

From someone who has over 15 years experience hiring technical and non-
technical folks.....

It is not uncommon to find groups who seldom are able to fill the job 
requisitions internally; not in Digital and not in other companies.  The 
reasons are usually BOTH technical and non-technical.  

Hiring people is always a crap shoot. The odds on getting a new hire - 
internally or from the outside - who is EXACTLY what you are looking for are 
astronomically stacked against you. Until the employee has been on the job
for a while, you never really know for sure how he/she will do.  Many - sadly,
MOST - hiring managers are uneasy about that.  With an internal transfer, you 
usually have a fairly accurate work history supported by reviews; resumes, the 
only work history of outside candidates, are brief by design and often loose 
with the truth.

It takes a lot of nerve/composure stemming from self- confidence to ride out
the learning curve of a new employee in a new job while that employee gets up
to speed.  If the situation is tense requiring a short learning curve, that
nerve gets tested. It is a lot easier to ride out a learning curve on an
employee who is new to the company; they have a lot more to learn.  It's just
another way of pointing the fickle finger of fate somewhere else, yet another
way of avoiding responsibility. 

From the non-technical perspective, we ALL carry baggage/tapes/etc.  Indeed, 
the more successful we are in getting things done, it often seems that 
the more baggage/bad tapes we seem to have.  When looking at internal 
candidates, any decent hiring manager is able to, in a fairly short time, 
find out what other people think of this person.  That manager has at his 
finger tips the employee's previous reviews for consideration.  Since many - 
sadly again, MOST - managers feel duty bound to put something slightly negative 
in each and every review, there will be a written record of warts.

So a good manager must weigh the pluses and minuses.  Personally, if I can find 
an internal candidate who at least has the basic technical tools to get the job 
done, that is where I will tend to go.  

First, the internal candidate can at least do the job (even though I MIGHT be
able to get a better person from outside). Of course, if you need someone with
considerable Unix OS experience and you did NOT get any internal applications
who had something more than trivial Unix OS experience, you probably SHOULD
look outside. 

Second, I do not have to suffer waiting for a new employee to get through the
new_to_Digital learning curve. Assuming there were SOME internal candidates who
were at least minimally capable of doing the work, they could have been hired a
while ago and been contributing for a while, now. 

Third, by hiring internally, I send a message to my employees that I value them
as team members to the point where I will take a chance with them before I will
take a chance with someone from outside. 

But then, again, it is often easier to just go outside.

As Always, For What It's Worth...

Dave

Re:         <<< Note 2646.11 by STAR::ABBASI "iam a good si'kick" >>>
    
>    DEC wants someone who knows Y, DEC has someone who knows X, so train
>    the one who knows X so that they now know Y .
>
>    what an amazing concept !

You and others seem to assume that all knowledge is gained by training.  In 
fact a great deal of knowledge is accumulated by *experience* and no amount 
of training will replace that. 

So it seems that they're looking for *experienced* people...

-  David

    
    
    	At the speed of technical change in the industry, Whats experience?

        ref. experience.

    reminds me of an Ad. i saw in early 80's asking for someone with 5 years
    experience in ADA language, this is when ADA compilers themselves were just 
    one or 2 years old if you can find one.

    now days we see the same, and even in DEC, managers asking for DECeees
    with NT experience, when NT itself was just released few weeks ago and when
    most DECeees have been using VAX/VMS for the last zillion years...

    and look at this C++ hype too that is going on, i just love to see
    those who writes these ads. they must have like PhD's in computer
    science, like fer sure, but i dont want to open another can filled with 
    many worms so i'll shut up.

    \bye!
    \nasser

    
    RE: .11 & .12
    
    This was a mail message I sent to IdeasCentral *3* years ago.  Think it
    made any difference?
    
    
From:	VINO::GRANSEWICZ   "Phil Gransewicz VPA 297-7584 MRO1-1/S43 
    					   pole GH33"  3-OCT-1990 16:53:39.13
To:	SONATA::IDEASCENTRAL
CC:	GRANSEWICZ
Subj:	Proactive Personnel Dept and Managers in Career Planning


	Problem:

	Even though Digital is "downsizing" we are actively
	hiring externally.  This means the problem isn't too many people
	but too many people with the wrong mix of skills.  Has anybody asked
	"Why do so many people have the wrong skill set?".  Many good,
	re-trainable people will be lost because their skill set was not
	managed the way any other critical resource should be.

	Recommendation:

	Increase corporate visibility of needed job classifications as well
	as shrinking job classifications.  People could then get a feel
	for where the company needs help and potential opportunities for
	advancement and re-training.  Once hard times hit, it's too late.

	This must be an ongoing process with the managers taking a more
	active roll in the employees skill set.  Left to the employee alone,
	enough information is not available to make intelligent career decisions
	as they relate to the Digital.  Career planning at Digital is nebulous
	at best.

	Signed,
	Phil Gransewicz